All entries on Feminist Legal Clinic’s News Digest Blog are extracts from news articles and other publications, with the source available at the link at the bottom. The content is not originally generated by Feminist Legal Clinic and does not necessarily reflect our views.
The Women’s Coalition has had a Discrimination against Women in Family Court lawsuit in the works for a while.
The complaint includes a list of types of discriminatory conduct routinely committed by judges. Each plaintiff will identify the ones that apply in her case (easy to check off in the form to join the lawsuit).
a. Denying women a hearing or allowing them only a perfunctory hearing in matters where women’s fundamental rights, liberty interests and other protected rights were at stake.
b. Giving temporary custody to men pending trial when a nondiscriminatory application of the law would have resulted in temporary custody being granted to women.
c. Appointing custody/parenting evaluators who demonstrated bias against women and favored men.
d. Appointing minor’s counsels or guardians ad litem [GAL’s] to represent children who demonstrated bias against women and favored men.
e. Accepting reports from custody evaluators and minor’s counsels/guardians ad litem that discriminated against women and favored men, and allowing them to influence judicial decisions.
f. Ordering women to submit to mental health evaluations while not ordering men to submit to mental health evaluations, based on the same quality and quantity of evidence.
g. Adjudicating matters in a sex discriminatory manner by favoring men even when evidence overwhelmingly demonstrated that men should not have been favored.
h. Discrediting women despite much evidence supporting they were telling the truth and/or little evidence they were lying; while crediting men despite little evidence supporting they were telling the truth and/or much evidence they were lying.
i. Minimizing and denying credible evidence and reports by women of a man’s abuse or poor parenting; while crediting non-credible evidence and reports by men of a woman’s abuse or poor parenting.
j. Making findings women were alienating children from men when alienation was not occurring; and/or not finding men were alienating children from women when alienation was occurring.
k. Disregarding the legal requirement that courts prioritize the best interests of children in a manner that favored men over women in custody and visitation rulings.
l. Ordering reunification of children with men were credibly accused of abuse; and not ordering reunification of children with women who were not credibly accused of abuse.
m. Ordering supervised visitation for women without credible evidence they were a danger to the children; and not ordering supervised visitation for men when there was credible evidence they are a danger to the children.
n. Threatening women, but not men, with loss of custody if they objected to the court’s position or orders.
o. Threatening women, but not men, with loss of custody if they continued to litigate for custody of, or visitation with, their children.
p. Issuing orders sealing records that favor women, while not issuing orders sealing records that favor men, based on a similar quality and quantity of evidence.
q. Issuing gag orders against women who spoke out or wanted to speak out, while not issuing similar gag orders against men.
r. Holding women in contempt and/or jailing them for exercising their First Amendment right to free speech; while not holding men in contempt or jailing them for similar behavior.
s. Holding women in contempt and/or jailing them for withholding visitation when they had a good reason, such as to protect children; while not holding men in contempt or jailing them for withholding visitation when they did not have a good reason for doing so.
The primary purpose of this lawsuit is to officially establish that there is, in fact, systemic discrimination against women in family courts.
Source: Discrimination against Women in Family Court Lawsuit: Update & Campaign
